Re: [Fwd: MySQL Benchmark page - Problem with vacuum() in PostgreSQL]

From: Michael Widenius <monty(at)mysql(dot)com>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Anna Ewerlid <Anna(dot)Ewerlid(at)signal(dot)uu(dot)se>, jamppa(at)mysql(dot)com
Subject: Re: [Fwd: MySQL Benchmark page - Problem with vacuum() in PostgreSQL]
Date: 2001-08-15 10:03:01
Message-ID: 15226.18645.421801.366971@narttu.mysql.fi
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


Hi!

>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:

Jan> Michael Widenius wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> Some things that I know we have missed in the single user
>> benchmark are:
>> - Sub select (all different forms of sub select, with a comparison
>> to normal selects for those select that can be
>> changed to normal selects)
>> - Foreign keys (which should contain a comparison with multi-table-delete)
>> - Transactions
>> - Rollback
>>
>> With comparison I mean that there should be at least one test that
>> makes it easy for the user to see which construct is better for
>> this database.

Jan> Can we clearify that point a little? Does it mean to define a
Jan> foreign key constraint in databases that support it and just
Jan> check for the error, but do all the appropriate locking and
Jan> existence checks for all operations (UPDATE/DELETE PK,
Jan> INSERT/UPDATE FK) on the client side for databases that don't
Jan> support it?

Jan> Well, especially because of the "appropriate locking", it'd
Jan> make much more sense to do it all in concurrent multiuser ...
Jan> :-)

The plan is to (in the long run) have a test that shows ALL speed
affects of foreign keys. This includes at least:

- Checking the constraint
- Time for forced rollback when a constraint fails
- Time of cascaded deletes

This above should of course be done both single and multi user.

Regards,
Monty

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Haworth 2001-08-15 10:51:35 Re: do I have a reserved word here or something???
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2001-08-15 09:16:13 Re: Re: nextval, sequences and sequencenames